Kissing the Arse

edited November 2015 in Game Of Thrones

I am a little over half way through and so far its pretty good. For the most part I am enjoying the game, and it feels good to be back in the GOT world again. Loved all the real voice actors for the people who appear in the game and they play their parts very well.

Semi spoiler comments to follow.

The one main problem I have had so far is with the story itself. You spend almost every single second of the first HALF of the game in a position of weakness. Each character is in a position where they are forced to be kissing someones a55 who is talking down to you, most of the time after killing member X in your family "for the good of your house". Whether playing as a small child lord, a handmaiden, or a nearly defenseless cripple, you are always trying to be diplomatic and turn the other cheek, mostly because it looks and feels as though you don't have a viable alternative.

Even in your own keep as lord of the Forresters you are constantly standing alone. Not one single soldier by your side??????????????? Wasn't until chapter 4 (just barely got here) when you finally find 20 from another house to stand by you lol.. Not sure my house even has a soldier in my non existent army at this point, since every encounter is just me and my mom or little sister alone vs 5 guys running their mouth. The one lone brother in Mareen feels like the only reprieve that can actually stand up for himself.

If I wasnt a huge game of thrones fan I honestly would never have gotten past the half way point, since I often logged off game pissed off about having to take another round of shit from the whitehills, but since im an addict I trudged on and glad I did. My suggestion would be to balance it out a bit more story wise, more for future titles since this one is done, but I really preferred the take no shit style of game that I was able to play in "The Wolf Among Us" to this bend a knee and take it up the...... that I have been feeling the first half of GOT. I know the idea is much like with Jofferey in the movie, where it feels that much better when you FINALLY get to stand up for yourself but its too long coming. So long that 2 of my 3 friends owning this game quit after chapter 3.

Not sure how it will impact my game but about half way through I just couldnt handle it anymore. Instead of bending the knee (where you probably should) I began punching faces and kicking their a55 off the wall. They may burn my house to the ground and take my head, but at least there will be a smile on my lip as it hits the ground.

What the hell, after all,... Valar Morghulis!

Comments

  • A "take no shit" kind of story for Game of Thrones wouldn't be true to the source material. It is a series about political intrigues. When you play the game of thrones, you are always at risk at pissing off a bigger fish, and the amount of risk you can take depends on how much power you have. The right allies on the right places are more important than anything.

    So I have to disagree and I hope TellTale never does such a thing.

  • Too many words

    enter image description here

  • Telltale wanted to place the players in a desperate situation, to make us feel alone and oppressed. I see what the writers were going for, but I don't agree with how they went about it. Forrester men appear and disappear when it's conveniant for the plot.

  • edited November 2015

    Agreed. I see what they were going for, but it really just played out to be annoying first half of game. Especially for people like me that waited until now to start and play most of it in a few days to get to chap 5 and be ready for when 6 comes out, or people that really put themselves in the characters shoes rather than just pick the right option and not care what is being said to you or what you are saying/doing in return.

    Felt like the writers just got hung up on the theme of "Be political, you don't have the strength to do otherwise" and ran with it to the extent that it felt that way almost every single second with every single character.

    There were many characters in GOT that didn't spend a single second, let alone the whole show kissing ass and bending a knee. For my time, I would much rather feel like Oberon as I play to enjoy a game, than Sansa Stark.

    Kireilt posted: »

    Telltale wanted to place the players in a desperate situation, to make us feel alone and oppressed. I see what the writers were going for, b

  • edited November 2015

    I believe you are right for wrong reasons. An option to actively resist the Whitehills and Bolton's does not belong in this game because of it's design. Telltale creates linear choose your own adventure video games. These games have set endings and all choices the players make must coincide with these endings. Stay with me Abeille, I'm going somewhere with this.

    How this works is Telltale gives us dozens of tiny choices. Half of these choices are flavour choices, meaning that they don't make difference except to give you the illusion that you're making a difference. The other half are variable choices. These choices don't come into play until the last episode. The last episode is the only episode in which our choices matter.

    The point I'm making is that "a take no shit" option wouldn't work because it's too drastic of a choice to account for, not because there's source material that must be followed.

    Abeille posted: »

    A "take no shit" kind of story for Game of Thrones wouldn't be true to the source material. It is a series about political intrigues. When y

  • That's a technical problem (but no less of a problem, sure), with a "take no shit option", not with a "take no shit story". As in, they could make a story that was all about the Forresters resisting everything that is thrown at them and being complete badasses all the time, with set consequences, where the options that seem more peaceful would end up on conflict and on the Forresters coming up above the Whitehills anyway. That would completely throw me off. Staying true to the source material is extremely important, since it is very likely that the people playing are fans of the source material, and that's why I don't want a "take no shit" kind of story.

    Kireilt posted: »

    I believe you are right for wrong reasons. An option to actively resist the Whitehills and Bolton's does not belong in this game because of

  • edited November 2015

    Except nobody said anything about the Forresters being badasses. Imnuktam states that he would rather have the option to resist even if it meant the house would be destroyed in the process. As for "option" and "story", the option is what allows us to choose our story.

    Abeille posted: »

    That's a technical problem (but no less of a problem, sure), with a "take no shit option", not with a "take no shit story". As in, they coul

  • Taking by his comparison with Asher, saying he seems to be the only one able to stand for himself, that's what it looks like he wants :T

    We do have that option with most characters, though. Imnuktam even said that's what he did halfway through. With Mira, alright, max we can do is being snarky, I give you that. But Rodrik can be defiant, violent and unreasonable as much as his condition permits (I know because I played my Rodrik as someone that never kneels).

    What else do you want? That our soldiers were not slaughtered back at the Red Wedding? Or maybe a Heavy Rain approach to the consequences of their acts, where main characters could die and the story would continue without them, with the ones that are still alive, until there is no one left?

    Kireilt posted: »

    Except nobody said anything about the Forresters being badasses. Imnuktam states that he would rather have the option to resist even if it m

  • The game could easily be coded to account for me standing up for myself or going even further to the extent of making rash decisions rather than always bending a knee. Something like my house crumbles and is destroyed because I didn't kiss the ring, if you were too extreme about never giving an inch. Wouldn't be hard to write in, would just mean that not 100% of the people who play would get the happily ever after ending and would play the game again (or rewind/reload) to see what happens if you do kiss the arse all game.

    My main point is it was NOT FUN for me to go from weak character to weak character watching family members die while you are helpless. Then hearing their killers gloat about it afterwards and being expected to constantly show restraint for three straight chapters or basically half the game or more. There were plenty of strong willed characters in GOT and they pretty much all turned out to be the ones I liked the most. I would have enjoyed game more if had been closer to a 50/50 balance between weak and strong characters. Half you have to be diplomatic with because its the smart or only choice, and other half that were respected and feared. As it was, it felt like every character was in a position of weakness except Asher.

    The main thing I loved about Oberyn was that he didn't take shit regardless of consequences. Even when alone with lannisters everywhere he wasn't afraid to tangle with two of them and put a dagger through one. I grew to love the hound near the end for the same reason, "if I hear one more word come out of your cunt mouth ill have to eat every fkin chicken in here" probably my favorite line in the series.

    Kireilt posted: »

    Except nobody said anything about the Forresters being badasses. Imnuktam states that he would rather have the option to resist even if it m

  • I agree with you that the Asher comparison doesn't hold up. As for everything else, it comes down to how contrived the Forrester's situation is, it feels inorganic. Yes Rodrik can be defiant, but that only changes other characters opinion of him, the situation remains static. I'm sure how familiar Imnuktam is with Telltale games, maybe the linearity is a bit off putting.

    Abeille posted: »

    Taking by his comparison with Asher, saying he seems to be the only one able to stand for himself, that's what it looks like he wants :T

  • Now you're being unrealistic. Also, Mira, Rodrik, and Gared can be strong characters depending on how you play them. The problem seems to be that you're afriad to play the way you want to because the game punish you.

    Imnuktam posted: »

    The game could easily be coded to account for me standing up for myself or going even further to the extent of making rash decisions rather

  • What's unrealistic about my post, the part where you don't give the happily ever after ending to everyone?

    Rodrik is much like I said, wounded to the point he was unable to stand up for himself or his family until the end of the third chapter (which is where my complaint lies, the first 3 chapters) except to take a beating for them and keep getting up. If you felt Mira was a strong character you must put more weight into sneaking into a wedding and a few snarky comments than I do. Perhaps its in the definition of strong character that you are losing what I am saying. What I am talking about and was looking for was a character or two that other npc's had to show restraint when dealing with, instead of literally always being the other way around.

    As for my fearing the game will punish me for my playstyle, I did feel that way for the first 2-3 chapters. By the end of the 3rd I was so sick of feeling like I had to take everyones crap that I just started doing what I wanted even if it was obviously the wrong choice. Felt great joining the other 15% that chose to kick that guy off the wall despite knowing I would get caught for it.

    Kireilt posted: »

    Now you're being unrealistic. Also, Mira, Rodrik, and Gared can be strong characters depending on how you play them. The problem seems to be that you're afriad to play the way you want to because the game punish you.

Sign in to comment in this discussion.